Bears Offseason Thread (Trestman new HC, pg 37)

[Banedon]

ie-

"Wait... wasn't Orlando Pace the Bears version of Orlando Pace?"

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

And my concern is Long could be the Bears version of Orlando Pace too. A second coming.

 

Pace was 34 when the Bears signed him. Jake Long is 28.

[scarey]

ie-

"Wait... wasn't Orlando Pace the Bears version of Orlando Pace?"

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

And my concern is Long could be the Bears version of Orlando Pace too. A second coming.

 

Pace was 34 when the Bears signed him. Jake Long is 28.

 

Age doesn't really factor into my concern though. Long's performance over the past few years does. I'm not predicting he's going to continue his trend of mediocre play, I'm just saying I'm concerned.

[SABR Gamer]

ie-

"Wait... wasn't Orlando Pace the Bears version of Orlando Pace?"

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

And my concern is Long could be the Bears version of Orlando Pace too. A second coming.

 

The way you are saying it is why people are confused. You could have worded this much better. I am sure most/everyone understand(s) by now but if not, scarey is saying he is worried that signing Long would be Pace 2.0 (the "Bears version" thing doesn't make any sense), another over the hill LT who used to be thought of very highly. It's not the best comparison, but that's what he seems to be getting at.

[Banedon]

Age doesn't really factor into my concern though. Long's performance over the past few years does. I'm not predicting he's going to continue his trend of mediocre play, I'm just saying I'm concerned.

 

But age was clearly a factor in Pace's mediocre play. The only way that Long would be similar to Pace is that it'd be a big name high priced free agent signing. And yes, there's a risk there, but frankly, the Bears are at a place with the O-line where you kinda have to take some FA risks. Good left tackles just don't become free agents often.

 

Now all that said, because FA LT's are a rarity, I'd rather draft an LT, and spend our O-line FA dollars on other spots on the line. I think you let Webb/Carimi battle it out for the RT spot. See if maybe you can upgrade LG and maybe C through free agency.

[Guest]

Age doesn't really factor into my concern though. Long's performance over the past few years does. I'm not predicting he's going to continue his trend of mediocre play, I'm just saying I'm concerned.

 

But age was clearly a factor in Pace's mediocre play. The only way that Long would be similar to Pace is that it'd be a big name high priced free agent signing. And yes, there's a risk there, but frankly, the Bears are at a place with the O-line where you kinda have to take some FA risks. Good left tackles just don't become free agents often.

 

Now all that said, because FA LT's are a rarity, I'd rather draft an LT, and spend our O-line FA dollars on other spots on the line. I think you let Webb/Carimi battle it out for the RT spot. See if maybe you can upgrade LG and maybe C through free agency.

 

You don't have to take a risk on Long. There are plenty of much less risky good options at tackle who would be substantial upgrades.

 

I want nothing to do with Long, especially at the price tag he is going to command.

[jersey cubs fan]

I think Orlando Pace is a really bad comp for the discussion. He's much more likely to be the next John Tait. The Bears were forced to overpay Tait because, hey what do you know, they had no offensive line. Tait was nothing special, but he filled a huge hole and allowed the team to stabilize the line for a few years (before the lack of attention in the draft, and aging among the rest of the line once again made it a problem).

[rawaction]

I think Orlando Pace is a really bad comp for the discussion. He's much more likely to be the next John Tait. The Bears were forced to overpay Tait because, hey what do you know, they had no offensive line. Tait was nothing special, but he filled a huge hole and allowed the team to stabilize the line for a few years (before the lack of attention in the draft, and aging among the rest of the line once again made it a problem).

Perfect comparison. And why im ok with overpaying Long provided the team is smart enough to realize that this is a short term fix and they need to continue to add to the line.

[biittner77]

He may not be dominant anymore, but I don't mind overpaying for such a huge need and a major upgrade over Webb. He's not Orlando Pace just yet.

 

He didn't make it into the top 20 in pass blocking efficiency for the second year in a row. I'm a little worried that he will be the Bears version of Orlando Pace.

Wait... wasn't Orlando Pace the Bears version of Orlando Pace?

 

 

What I meant was:

 

Long = Orlando Pace when he was on the Bears

 

not:

 

Long on the Bears = Orlando Pace

 

Sorry for the confusion.

 

It really wasn't that confusing.

 

As far as a comparison goes, there's a reason why good LTs don't hit the FA market. That the fact Long is even available should present something of a red flag. Long is Younger than PAce was when he came to the Bears but based on recent performance and injuries he *may* be done. I haven't followed Long's career. What injuries has he had?

[Banedon]

I think Orlando Pace is a really bad comp for the discussion. He's much more likely to be the next John Tait. The Bears were forced to overpay Tait because, hey what do you know, they had no offensive line. Tait was nothing special, but he filled a huge hole and allowed the team to stabilize the line for a few years (before the lack of attention in the draft, and aging among the rest of the line once again made it a problem).

 

Yes. That's it exactly.

[UMFan83]

I miss John Tait. I wonder if he can still play. Lets give him a call.

[Guest]

I'm with David here. With guys like Beatty and possibly Albert making it to free agency, there's no need to gamble on Long.

[jersey cubs fan]

I'm with David here. With guys like Beatty and possibly Albert making it to free agency, there's no need to gamble on Long.

 

There's no need to cross him off the board yet because the "possibility" of other guys is useless.

 

The Bears need a LT. They cannot miss out on one by only looking at ideal candidates.

[KingCubsFan]

I'm with David here. With guys like Beatty and possibly Albert making it to free agency, there's no need to gamble on Long.

 

There's no need to cross him off the board yet because the "possibility" of other guys is useless.

 

The Bears need a LT. They cannot miss out on one by only looking at ideal candidates.

Yeah, you have to target them all. And isn't Albert getting franchised?

[Guest]

I'm with David here. With guys like Beatty and possibly Albert making it to free agency, there's no need to gamble on Long.

 

There's no need to cross him off the board yet because the "possibility" of other guys is useless.

 

The Bears need a LT. They cannot miss out on one by only looking at ideal candidates.

Yeah, you have to target them all. And isn't Albert getting franchised?

 

 

I feel like some people are not realizing just how bad Long has been.

 

Couple that with the amount of money he is going to get and you absolutely do cross him out unless that number comes way down from what it seems likely to be. And even then, I'm not sure he's all that useful.

[KingCubsFan]

I'm with David here. With guys like Beatty and possibly Albert making it to free agency, there's no need to gamble on Long.

 

There's no need to cross him off the board yet because the "possibility" of other guys is useless.

 

The Bears need a LT. They cannot miss out on one by only looking at ideal candidates.

Yeah, you have to target them all. And isn't Albert getting franchised?

 

 

I feel like some people are not realizing just how bad Long has been.

 

Couple that with the amount of money he is going to get and you absolutely do cross him out unless that number comes way down from what it seems likely to be. And even then, I'm not sure he's all that useful.

If the Bears are comfortable with his medicals, I don't have a problem with it. That's the only reason his play has dropped off the few years.

[jersey cubs fan]

I feel like some people are not realizing just how bad Long has been.

.

 

I feel like some people are relying far too heavily on completely unproven ranking systems to determine the value of football players.

[Tyrant]

I feel like some people are not realizing just how bad Long has been.

.

 

I feel like some people are relying far too heavily on completely unproven ranking systems to determine the value of football players.

 

Exactly.

[Guest]

I feel like some people are not realizing just how bad Long has been.

.

 

I feel like some people are relying far too heavily on completely unproven ranking systems to determine the value of football players.

 

It's not just "unproven ranking systems."

 

The eye test matches (which, admittedly, these ranking systems kind of inherently have to be based on) up.

[Guest]

And we know that Emery is looking at said ranking systems.

[scarey]

I feel like some people are not realizing just how bad Long has been.

.

 

I feel like some people are relying far too heavily on completely unproven ranking systems to determine the value of football players.

 

Isn't this like the antithesis of NSBB?

 

I mean, I understand that baseball advanced metrics are a million times more reliable and proven, but there was a time when they weren't as widely acclaimed. Also, there's a lot of discussion of PER in NBA threads, FO ratings are used as gospel in most NFL threads, and even pass blocking efficiency (which is the ranking system I assume you're referring to) has been used to make many an argument without being questioned.

 

Why all the sudden is this system "completely unproven"?

[rawaction]

Long isnt most people's first choice. But the reason I have latched on to him in particular is because ive always thought he was the most realistic. Figured Albert and Clady would be franchised if not resigned. Other teams like the giants and vikes can afford their guys. Even bad Jake Long is much better than the Beats currently have or could draft at 20. If that takes 10mil for a John Tait type....so be it. Its sorely needed.

[KingCubsFan]

I feel like some people are not realizing just how bad Long has been.

.

 

I feel like some people are relying far too heavily on completely unproven ranking systems to determine the value of football players.

 

Isn't this like the antithesis of NSBB?

 

I mean, I understand that baseball advanced metrics are a million times more reliable and proven, but there was a time when they weren't as widely acclaimed. Also, there's a lot of discussion of PER in NBA threads, FO ratings are used as gospel in most NFL threads, and even pass blocking efficiency (which is the ranking system I assume you're referring to) has been used to make many an argument without being questioned.

 

Why all the sudden is this system "completely unproven"?

I may be in the minority, but I think it's just as ludicrous when people value a baseball player solely on WAR. All numbers are useful, but determining a player's worth based on one number or formula isn't that helpful.

[Guest]

I feel like some people are not realizing just how bad Long has been.

.

 

I feel like some people are relying far too heavily on completely unproven ranking systems to determine the value of football players.

 

Isn't this like the antithesis of NSBB?

 

I mean, I understand that baseball advanced metrics are a million times more reliable and proven, but there was a time when they weren't as widely acclaimed. Also, there's a lot of discussion of PER in NBA threads, FO ratings are used as gospel in most NFL threads, and even pass blocking efficiency (which is the ranking system I assume you're referring to) has been used to make many an argument without being questioned.

 

Why all the sudden is this system "completely unproven"?

I may be in the minority, but I think it's just as ludicrous when people value a baseball player solely on WAR. All numbers are useful, but determining a player's worth based on one number or formula isn't that helpful.

 

it's essentially a reflection of a player's net contribution to run production and run prevention. how isn't that extremely helpful?

[jersey cubs fan]

I feel like some people are not realizing just how bad Long has been.

.

 

I feel like some people are relying far too heavily on completely unproven ranking systems to determine the value of football players.

 

Isn't this like the antithesis of NSBB?

 

I mean, I understand that baseball advanced metrics are a million times more reliable and proven, but there was a time when they weren't as widely acclaimed. Also, there's a lot of discussion of PER in NBA threads, FO ratings are used as gospel in most NFL threads, and even pass blocking efficiency (which is the ranking system I assume you're referring to) has been used to make many an argument without being questioned.

 

Why all the sudden is this system "completely unproven"?

 

All the sudden? It's never been. This isn't baseball. Baseball metrics work because you can specifically track individual performance, as it is an individual game, and the sample size is ample in any one season. Football is not, and tracking individual performance with a system like this is flawed from the outset.

[Magnetic Curses]

I feel like some people are not realizing just how bad Long has been.

.

 

I feel like some people are relying far too heavily on completely unproven ranking systems to determine the value of football players.

 

Isn't this like the antithesis of NSBB?

 

I mean, I understand that baseball advanced metrics are a million times more reliable and proven, but there was a time when they weren't as widely acclaimed. Also, there's a lot of discussion of PER in NBA threads, FO ratings are used as gospel in most NFL threads, and even pass blocking efficiency (which is the ranking system I assume you're referring to) has been used to make many an argument without being questioned.

 

Why all the sudden is this system "completely unproven"?

I may be in the minority, but I think it's just as ludicrous when people value a baseball player solely on WAR. All numbers are useful, but determining a player's worth based on one number or formula isn't that helpful.

 

i don't want to get into a discussion of WAR in the bears thread, but WAR is essentially a formula based on a lot of numbers.